God and the World, what do you think? [Does God Exist II]

[Jute]

The question of God is an inherently meaningless question. Nobody knows. Nobody will ever know, until you die or some incredible divine intervention takes place. Theists and atheists alike are just going by opinions based on their personal observations.

Also whatever a person important to them has said. Otherwise, I mostly agree with you.

[The Wrestling Ring]

Well, I was speaking more of how you as an individual would definitely know if God exists. Someone important telling you would fall into the "opinions based on observation" thing.

[The Soviet League]

That said, I'm fairly certain that if everything religious magically vanished from the Earth, tomorrow (temples, books, knowledge in people's heads, et cetera), we wouldn't recreate it. At least, not for a long while. And this would be an overall good thing.

How would it benefit?

[Jute]

That said, I'm fairly certain that if everything religious magically vanished from the Earth, tomorrow (temples, books, knowledge in people's heads, et cetera), we wouldn't recreate it. At least, not for a long while. And this would be an overall good thing.

Uh... no. Already because of their historical value as cultural heritage this would be a huge loss. And that religion is part of human nature?
And how would it be a good thing? You couldn't exactly expect less wars, maybe even more. Not to say religion can be great at fulfilling some basic human needs (comfort, giving hope, giving structure and purpose, and more), and is largely in a tolerant society beneficial for everyone? In a lot of places in the US, churches serve as community centers, too, and the religion serves as the social glue.

[Jute]

That said, I'm fairly certain that if everything religious magically vanished from the Earth, tomorrow (temples, books, knowledge in people's heads, et cetera), we wouldn't recreate it. At least, not for a long while. And this would be an overall good thing.

How would it benefit?

Honestly, as someone majoring in history, I'd say not at all. This is what some atheists like to believe, a way of wishful thinking to justify their standpoint. Not any better than wishing the entire world to be Christian and expecting it to solve some problems.

[Twilight Imperium]

That said, I'm fairly certain that if everything religious magically vanished from the Earth, tomorrow (temples, books, knowledge in people's heads, et cetera), we wouldn't recreate it. At least, not for a long while. And this would be an overall good thing.

Uh... no. Already because of their historical value as cultural heritage this would be a huge loss. And that religion is part of human nature?
And how would it be a good thing? You couldn't exactly expect less wars, maybe even more. Not to say religion can be great at fulfilling some basic human needs (comfort, giving hope, giving structure and purpose, and more), and is largely in a tolerant society beneficial for everyone? In a lot of places in the US, churches serve as community centers, too, and the religion serves as the social glue.

There's a lot of things people build communities around. Plus the overall decline in institutionalized magical thinking would be nice, too. People would still believe weird things for no reason, but we wouldn't consider them more moral for doing so.

I personally enjoy a lot of religious music, and many churches are quite beautiful, but that's why it's a "net positive" instead of "completely a good thing".

[Vilatania]

How would it benefit?

Honestly, as someone majoring in history, I'd say not at all. This is what some atheists like to believe, a way of wishful thinking to justify their standpoint. Not any better than wishing the entire world to be Christian and expecting it to solve some problems.

That's a little bit presumptuous don't you think? I'm not looking to 'justify' my standpoint through my belief that elimination of religion would stop a lot of wars and other conflict.

We can't assume that there would be MORE wars because there is little reason to do so. What we have today and have had for thousands of years is many wars and extreme hostility between people BECAUSE of their belief in THEIR version of God. We know that without religion those particular conflicts would no longer occur. We have no way to knowing what conflicts if any would take their place. The human race is entirely capable of not killing each other if you take away the things that are giving them excuses to do so.

We like to tell ourselves that it's human nature. That humans just kill each other because that's what we do. I don't think so. There was a time before war when humans didn't murder each other over stupid things, such a time will hopefully come again when we've gotten our shit together and get rid of the problems that are giving us a reason to fight. And that isn't just religion, the whole over population thing needs to be addressed among other things. People need to stop having kids for the sole purpose of sucking up free money from the government, they can't see it now and nor do they care but they are actually making the whole 'poor' thing worse by doing that. Sorry got off topic.

[The Third Nova Terra of Scrin]

But, everything do has a cause. It would be illogical to assert that something can pop out randomly.

We don't know that for sure. It's still possible that the Universe simply always existed. The problem that I see with first cause is that there still had to be something to cause the cause. Infinite causality is less likely than infinite existence imo.

Also you mentioned how I was being unaccommodating to you.
Unaccommodating
adjective
adjective: unaccommodating
not in harmony with the wishes or demands of others; unhelpful

You were making demands?

A first cause is needed because a having everything have causes will lead to an infinite regress of causes which will not even make it possible for the current state of events to even exit.

No, I'm not demanding. I'm just requesting that you talk more nicely a little bit. I'm not just impressed at your attitude when I read your posts about fighting and you winning. No one's fighting here and trying to win, and we're not going away because we're stumped. I read some of your posts where you said that. Don't make unneeded assumptions at people. Hope you understand that.

[The Creepoc Infinite]

We don't know that for sure. It's still possible that the Universe simply always existed. The problem that I see with first cause is that there still had to be something to cause the cause. Infinite causality is less likely than infinite existence imo.

Also you mentioned how I was being unaccommodating to you.
Unaccommodating
adjective
adjective: unaccommodating
not in harmony with the wishes or demands of others; unhelpful

You were making demands?

A first cause is needed because a having everything have causes will lead to an infinite regress of causes which will not even make it possible for the current state of events to even exit.

No, I'm not demanding. I'm just requesting that you talk more nicely a little bit. I'm not just impressed at your attitude when I read your posts about fighting and you winning. No one's fighting here and trying to win, and we're not going away because we're stumped. I read some of your posts where you said that. Don't make unneeded assumptions at people. Hope you understand that.

A first cause is not needed.
And why is an infinite regress something we can't have? Seems plausible to me, even if I don't completely understand it.

Why can't the universe be its own cause?
There was no before the universe, there is no outside the universe, there is no first cause as the universe has always been.

[The Third Nova Terra of Scrin]

Honestly, as someone majoring in history, I'd say not at all. This is what some atheists like to believe, a way of wishful thinking to justify their standpoint. Not any better than wishing the entire world to be Christian and expecting it to solve some problems.

That's a little bit presumptuous don't you think? I'm not looking to 'justify' my standpoint through my belief that elimination of religion would stop a lot of wars and other conflict.

We can't assume that there would be MORE wars because there is little reason to do so. What we have today and have had for thousands of years is many wars and extreme hostility between people BECAUSE of their belief in THEIR version of God. We know that without religion those particular conflicts would no longer occur. We have no way to knowing what conflicts if any would take their place. The human race is entirely capable of not killing each other if you take away the things that are giving them excuses to do so.

We like to tell ourselves that it's human nature. That humans just kill each other because that's what we do. I don't think so. There was a time before war when humans didn't murder each other over stupid things, such a time will hopefully come again when we've gotten our shit together and get rid of the problems that are giving us a reason to fight. And that isn't just religion, the whole over population thing needs to be addressed among other things. People need to stop having kids for the sole purpose of sucking up free money from the government, they can't see it now and nor do they care but they are actually making the whole 'poor' thing worse by doing that. Sorry got off topic.

Religion, is not to be blamed for causing wars. If anything, it's one of the worst arguments against religion. The Napoleonic Wars, World War II, World War I, Seven-Year War, Hundred Years' War, Vietnam War and even the Korean War were not caused by religion. At least, limit the bash on religion at the Crusades.

The simple evidence that not all war is caused by religion is the fact is that you did not hear about Buddhist wars, Hindu wars, Rastafarian wars, Shinto wars, Confucian wars, Jainist wars and Bahaist wars. It's only Christians and Muslims doing most of the fighting.

Humans can make any kind of excuse at making and starting warfare. Religion is only one of them. Though I admit that sometimes warfare can be caused by religious reasons, religion need not to be the only fuel for religion. People can start a war just because someone cut an ear or someone likes to sit on a golden stool - http://www.cracked.com/article_17123_th ... ought.html, and you'd better bash that more stupid wars rather than blame all warfare in human history to all religious belief.

[The Third Nova Terra of Scrin]

A first cause is needed because a having everything have causes will lead to an infinite regress of causes which will not even make it possible for the current state of events to even exit.

No, I'm not demanding. I'm just requesting that you talk more nicely a little bit. I'm not just impressed at your attitude when I read your posts about fighting and you winning. No one's fighting here and trying to win, and we're not going away because we're stumped. I read some of your posts where you said that. Don't make unneeded assumptions at people. Hope you understand that.

A first cause is not needed.
And why is an infinite regress something we can't have? Seems plausible to me, even if I don't completely understand it.

Why can't the universe be its own cause?
There was no before the universe, there is no outside the universe, there is no first cause as the universe has always been.

Lol.

The Universe has a beginning, as to the 1st Law and 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. At least, read my previous too long post before you again make your own points.

[The Creepoc Infinite]

A first cause is not needed.
And why is an infinite regress something we can't have? Seems plausible to me, even if I don't completely understand it.

Why can't the universe be its own cause?
There was no before the universe, there is no outside the universe, there is no first cause as the universe has always been.

Lol.

The Universe has a beginning, as to the 1st Law and 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. At least, read my previous too long post before you again make your own points.

The law of entropy?
What about it?

[The Third Nova Terra of Scrin]

Lol.

The Universe has a beginning, as to the 1st Law and 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. At least, read my previous too long post before you again make your own points.

The law of entropy?
What about it?

And that exactly is it.

In contrast, there is good evidence that the universe had a beginning. This can be shown from the Laws of Thermodynamics, the most fundamental laws of the physical sciences.

1st Law: The total amount of mass-energy in the universe is constant.
2nd Law: The amount of energy available for work is running out, or entropy is increasing to a maximum.

If the total amount of mass-energy is limited, and the amount of usable energy is decreasing, then the universe cannot have existed forever, otherwise it would already have exhausted all usable energy—the ‘heat death’ of the universe. For example, all radioactive atoms would have decayed, every part of the universe would be the same temperature, and no further work would be possible. So the obvious corollary is that the universe began a finite time ago with a lot of usable energy, and is now running down.

[The East Asian Post-Apocalyptic Pact]

When this thread opened I became happy. When I read the first few responses, their edginess gave me cancer. However, reading these more competent posts cured it. Thanks guys! keep it up.

[The Creepoc Infinite]

When this thread opened I became happy. When I read the first few responses, their edginess gave me cancer. However, reading these more competent posts cured it. Thanks guys! keep it up.

You're welcome

[Timsvill]

I personally believe in god and heaven. How I see it is that, the bible tells who and why, then science tells the when and how. I believe science and the bible go hand and hand.

I have atheist friend who asked me these questions. Well the big bang occurred, so why do you believe that god was the creator of the universe when there's proof of the big bang!? God is the creator of the universe, he put the atoms there that caused the big bang theory. There are several theories on how the big bang occurred, what caused it. In ether theory, god put the stuff there that caused the big bang. How could god be alive before the big bang? He's god. He was here before any of us! Now before you say "But there is no proof god is real", I believe god and have faith in god being real. No matter what you say, I still believe god is real.

In the bible, you say "God formed and made the earth and other planets." When in actuality, the planets formed when meteors were crashing into each other and were expanding from the little piece of the destroyed meteors. Making planets. What do you have to say about that? God put the meteors there. He set each meteor up as which ones would get bigger and become planets and which ones will be destroyed. Like the other planets, when god thought earth was ready to have stuff on it, he put water molecules on earth forming the oceans. He then made Teutonic plates, then he put the land masses on, then made the pioneer species. After that, he let earth sort it's self out.

Evolution, what do you have to say about that? If scientist can prove evolution, then we know that god decided to change and form humans in stages. Monkeys were the template for humans. *laughs* Anyways, so once we became humans, he then made adam and eve.

That's my views on god, religion, and science.

[Sociobiology]

That's a little bit presumptuous don't you think? I'm not looking to 'justify' my standpoint through my belief that elimination of religion would stop a lot of wars and other conflict.

We can't assume that there would be MORE wars because there is little reason to do so. What we have today and have had for thousands of years is many wars and extreme hostility between people BECAUSE of their belief in THEIR version of God. We know that without religion those particular conflicts would no longer occur. We have no way to knowing what conflicts if any would take their place. The human race is entirely capable of not killing each other if you take away the things that are giving them excuses to do so.

We like to tell ourselves that it's human nature. That humans just kill each other because that's what we do. I don't think so. There was a time before war when humans didn't murder each other over stupid things, such a time will hopefully come again when we've gotten our shit together and get rid of the problems that are giving us a reason to fight. And that isn't just religion, the whole over population thing needs to be addressed among other things. People need to stop having kids for the sole purpose of sucking up free money from the government, they can't see it now and nor do they care but they are actually making the whole 'poor' thing worse by doing that. Sorry got off topic.

Religion, is not to be blamed for causing wars. If anything, it's one of the worst arguments for religion. The Napoleonic Wars, World War II, World War I, Seven-Year War, Hundred Years' War, Vietnam War and even the Korean War were not caused by religion. At least, limit the bash on religion at the Crusades.

The simple evidence that not all war is caused by religion is the fact is that you did not hear about Buddhist wars, Hindu wars, Rastafarian wars, Shinto wars, Confucian wars, Jainist wars and Bahaist wars. It's only Christians and Muslims doing most of the fighting.

you realize most of those actually did happen, right?
just because they did not involve Europeans does not mean they didn't happen.

[Sociobiology]

That said, I'm fairly certain that if everything religious magically vanished from the Earth, tomorrow (temples, books, knowledge in people's heads, et cetera), we wouldn't recreate it. At least, not for a long while. And this would be an overall good thing.

How would it benefit?

“Anyway, if you stop tellin' people it's all sorted out after they're dead, they might try sorting it all out while they're alive. ”
― Terry Pratchett

[The East Asian Post-Apocalyptic Pact]

How would it benefit?

“Anyway, if you stop tellin' people it's all sorted out after they're dead, they might try sorting it all out while they're alive. ”
― Terry Pratchett

Is that for religion or against religion?

[Sociobiology]

We don't know that for sure. It's still possible that the Universe simply always existed. The problem that I see with first cause is that there still had to be something to cause the cause. Infinite causality is less likely than infinite existence imo.

Also you mentioned how I was being unaccommodating to you.
Unaccommodating
adjective
adjective: unaccommodating
not in harmony with the wishes or demands of others; unhelpful

You were making demands?

A first cause is needed because a having everything have causes will lead to an infinite regress of causes which will not even make it possible for the current state of events to even exit.

except if an uncaused causes can exist then the universe doesn't need a cause, if everything needs a cause then you can only have a infinite regress you can't get a first cause if the assumptions that make it necessary are true. It is a self-refuting concept.

[Sociobiology]

“Anyway, if you stop tellin' people it's all sorted out after they're dead, they might try sorting it all out while they're alive. ”
― Terry Pratchett

Is that for religion or against religion?

what besides religion tells people "it's all sorted out after they're dead"?

[The East Asian Post-Apocalyptic Pact]

what besides religion tells people "it's all sorted out after they're dead"?

Well answer questions with questions I guess...

Why would that be religion saying that when in Christianity, the largest faith in the world, teaches, "You gotta straighten your shit up before you die, or you gonna go to hell."?

[Sociobiology]

what besides religion tells people "it's all sorted out after they're dead"?

Well answer questions with questions I guess...

Why would that be religion saying that when in Christianity, the largest faith in the world, teaches, "You gotta straighten your shit up before you die, or you gonna go to hell."

which is getting sorted out after you die.

[The East Asian Post-Apocalyptic Pact]

which is getting sorted out after you die.

lolwut. That reading comprehension though
Not very specific about that, are you? What is this this "it" Pratchet speaks of? I'm pretty sure it's sin if pertaining to religion.

[Sociobiology]

which is "getting sorted out after you die".

lolwut. That reading comprehension though
Not very specific about that, are you? What is this this "it" Pratchet speaks of? I'm pretty sure it's sin if pertaining to religion.

existence, getting along with one another, multiple beliefs coexisting and respecting one another.
and before you say Christianity teaches coexistence, it seriously undermines that by telling people that those that don't believe what they believe get punished.

as for comprehension that was my fault forgot the quotes.